If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Rule enforcement without an umpire

Hi BC,

I am looking for opinions on whether it is ok to call faults against your opponents when playing in a match or not. For example, If your opponent strikes the shuttle above the lowest rib can I call a fault, or if the opponent moves before the serve can I call a fault or if the shuttle his hit twice by your opponent/s, etc.

There are other examples but I am looking to see if BC members think the rules can be enforced without an umpire?

Obviously dubious line calls can be questioned and honesty is expected when playing by all players.

I am looking for opinions on whether it is ok to call faults against your opponents when playing in a match or not. For example, If your opponent strikes the shuttle above the lowest rib can I call a fault, or if the opponent moves before the serve can I call a fault or if the shuttle his hit twice by your opponent/s, etc.

There are other examples but I am looking to see if BC members think the rules can be enforced without an umpire?

Obviously dubious line calls can be questioned and honesty is expected when playing by all players.

Thanks

It's ok yes, but you will make enemies, people are sensitive and unreasonable.

Serve height fault: already very subjective even from the service judge's perspective, so difficult for a player to call one here. In my experience against such players who to me obviously has a service fault, what I'd do is do the same back to him in order to gain the same advantage that he has.

Receiver fault: again very subjective and hard for you to call it as your opponent doesn't know exactly when your racket hits the shuttle, only you know. Again in my experience, against such rushing receivers is that I purposely delay or slow down my forward service stroke to tempt them to move forward, then that's when I accelerate the racket into a flick over their heads.

The service and receiver faults are tricky. If I notice one of those two I tell my opponents after the rally. In case of double hits or clothing faults I call them right away if my opponent doesn't notice or simply ignores it.
Some people tend to get a little bit edgy when being corrected so be careful in what tone of voice you talk to your opponent

If you are the opponent, you cannot call a fault on the serve. You are not at the correct height to judge so. It's best to call an independent person in. Since there usually is not one available, the best thing to do is to improve your receiving to cope with all situations like this.

For double hits, I notice this definitely a European curiosity. The rules state that the racquet must be in one continuous stroke. Yet, those in UK who call double hits, those that I have seen are still all one continuous stroke. In Asia, all shots are counted, even those that slide a bit on the racquet (because that is not a double hit). I believe the Asian perspective is the correct interpretation of the rule:

Rule 13.3.8. A shuttle hitting the head and the stringed area of the racquet in one stroke shall not be a "fault".

"Hitting twice in succession" - that happens if the shuttle comes to you, you hit it up in the air first on your side of the court, and then take a second swipe at it.

If you are the opponent, you cannot call a fault on the serve. For double hits, I notice this definitely a European curiosity.

This is interesting Cheung. If the opponent is obviously hitting the shuttle above the lower rib with the shaft of the racket going up then it should be called as a fault. Also if the opponent moves before the shuttle is struck this also should be called as a fault.

The European oddity of calling a "sling shot" probably stems from sportsmanship and wanting to play the game fairly. This is a deep rooted British trait however I see less and less people calling these shots , faults. Personally I think a frame shot is ok but a sling shot is not as it is not the intended shot.

For double hits, I notice this definitely a European curiosity. The rules state that the racquet must be in one continuous stroke. Yet, those in UK who call double hits, those that I have seen are still all one continuous stroke. In Asia, all shots are counted, even those that slide a bit on the racquet (because that is not a double hit). I believe the Asian perspective is the correct interpretation of the rule:

Rule 13.3.8. A shuttle hitting the head and the stringed area of the racquet in one stroke shall not be a "fault".

It shall be a ‘fault’:
13.3.7 is caught and held on the racket and then slung during the execution of a stroke

Sometimes this happens within a second or so but still, a fault if hooked back, that is what i believe you are seeing and what Europeans are calling out because it is indeed a fault.

In all of the local leagues which I have played, you can call a serve, receiver, double-hit or sling fault on your opponent. Line calls are always made by whose side it is on.

Fortunately, virtually everyone I've encountered has played with a high level of sportsmanship. However, I recall one individual in the Birmingham league. Not happy with his shot being called out in the previous rally, he deliberately called the next service out, despite it landing at least a foot in!

In response to the original question, you can call faults, but do so only when it's blatant and persistent (people do make the occasional mistake). As has been already stated, call the fault tactfully & be prepared for animosity.

In games without an umpire I do not consider it a particularly good idea to call service and receiver faults, especially because, even with an umpire/service judge on court, not every single service fault will be called. The more important question in cases like this, is not wether a service or a receiver action, or any other action is illegal, but wether the opponent can handle whatever the shuttle does as a result of this action. When there is no handling issue, you should just let the matter rest. Make your points yourself and do not try to get them from your opponent.

It is however possible that you will experience a handling problem in dealing with your opponent's illegal action(s). In that case I would suggest that you discuss the matter briefly, immediately after the rally. I would certainly advise against interrupting a rally in order to confront an oppenent with the situation. The end of the rally is early enough. Mind, when I say "handling problem" I mean this in a strictly phisical sense. Irritation or anger simply because someone does something illegal of course will influence a players handling capacity, but that is a character thing and can have no influence on whether a certain shot or action constitutes a handling problem or not.

In games without an umpire I do not consider it a particularly good idea to call service and receiver faults, especially because, even with an umpire/service judge on court, not every single service fault will be called. The more important question in cases like this, is not wether a service or a receiver action, or any other action is illegal, but wether the opponent can handle whatever the shuttle does as a result of this action. When there is no handling issue, you should just let the matter rest. Make your points yourself and do not try to get them from your opponent.

It is however possible that you will experience a handling problem in dealing with your opponent's illegal action(s). In that case I would suggest that you discuss the matter briefly, immediately after the rally. I would certainly advise against interrupting a rally in order to confront an oppenent with the situation. The end of the rally is early enough. Mind, when I say "handling problem" I mean this in a strictly phisical sense. Irritation or anger simply because someone does something illegal of course will influence a players handling capacity, but that is a character thing and can have no influence on whether a certain shot or action constitutes a handling problem or not.

Even if the receiver rushes the serve?

The main reason I started this thread is to see what the opinions were on BC. I am trying to make others aware that it is possible to enforce BWF rules without an umpire. Without an umpire being present some people cheat to gain advantage which is something I don't like. You even see cheating at pro level with players trying to influence umpires and line judges. Not good role models!

Yes, this also applies to a revceiver rushing the service. Mind, when his rush brings him a winning return, the rally is over and you can bring the mater up with him immediately. I would not advise to start with claiming the point, but you could suggest a let. In cases where this does not constitute a handling problem, you could choose to let the matter rest. In that case, the occasional flick service could very well make the receiver change his ways.

I fully support your views on players cheating on purpose in matches without an umpire. This shows exceptionally poor sportsmanship and as an opponent you are certainly in your right to take action against this. However, there are also many who simply do not know and that requires a slightly different approach.

With proffessionals, I would say things are a little different. Players and officials may both be expected to be well equipped to do there job properly. Where it is the players objective and sometimes even obligation to win, it is the official's duty to let this happen in a fair manner. As far as I am concerned, players may try everything they want. It is my business to make sure they don't get away with it.

There are also cases where your opponent just does not know the rules, but insists that he/she does! I was playing in a mixed game at a club (not a tournament, and of course no umpires etc) and my male opponent was serving to me. His lady partner stood in front of him as usual, but was positioned by her partner (and she had no say in the matter) in such a way that I could not see the shuttle while it was being served. I complained, before the serve, that I couldn't see the shuttle, and he said that he was a coach and that I couldn't demand to see the shuttle while it was being served. I didn't press the matter at the time - it was just a club game.

Of course, i didn't have a copy of the rule book in my bag, but the following week, I gave him a copy of the relevant rule (9.5) and gently told him about being unsighted. He took it well, actually.

It shall be a ‘fault’:
13.3.7 is caught and held on the racket and then slung during the execution of a stroke

Sometimes this happens within a second or so but still, a fault if hooked back, that is what i believe you are seeing and what Europeans are calling out because it is indeed a fault.

If this happens in a single stroke, it is very difficult to call. It has a lot of ambiguity. That's why I prefer not to call this a fault unless you really do have an umpire available. My interpretation of that rule is to prevent the scenario of a) catching the shuttle on the racquet strings, and then, b) walking up to the net and slinging it down. And the racquet can still be in one continuous motion if you keep moving it in a circular fashion.

For the rushing of serve, again, ambiguous. To be honest, I don't mind rushers of serve. One can deal with them by serving flicks or drive serve or out wide. You do need to alter the trajectory of the serve so that the shuttle follows a flatter pathway. Many people will serve such that the shuttle's highest point occurs after going past the net - easy for a fast person to receive. One can actually move the serving base back 6inches to cope. It sounds counter intuitive - after all, the receiver has more time to get to the net. But, although he is closer to the net, he may not be able to push so well from the net because now the shuttle is dropping. The server will then have to adjust an anticipate for a third shot near the net.

Definitely, changing the serving base may not be effective. That's why you have to have a few variations of the angle which you can serve well from. Each receiver has a hitting point where they are very good from. Work out early in the match where this is. In subsequent rallies, use it against them by avoiding it. Receivers also have preferences on left and right sides of the court.

I remember playing one person who was so fast on the receiving, I really thought he was rushing. My doubles serve is a very consistent part of my game so it's rare for a receiver to hit it down. I put in a couple of flick serves in, which also got buried . A couple more serves later, I discovered standing back 6inches and serving outwards a little bit put him right off. He had to return by hitting upwards. That gave us a chance to get back into the game.

If they can cope with every single serve you give them, let's face it - at the end of the day, the opponent is just too good - No need to voice it out loud though

If this happens in a single stroke, it is very difficult to call. It has a lot of ambiguity. That's why I prefer not to call this a fault unless you really do have an umpire available. My interpretation of that rule is to prevent the scenario of a) catching the shuttle on the racquet strings, and then, b) walking up to the net and slinging it down. And the racquet can still be in one continuous motion if you keep moving it in a circular fashion.

In this instance the player playing the stroke should call their own fault. They will know if it is a clean or slung shot.